gogmorgo

IIRC there are two bolt positions for the sway bar bushings/mounts, but I'd have to crawl under and check. I ran with no sway bar for a few days. Even at stock height it was sketchier than I cared for. Corners were nuts, crosswinds got hairy, but probably the worst was discovering that without turning the wheel far enough off centre to deviate from a straight line I could rock the truck side to side enough it felt like I would pick up a wheel, which wasn't of itself what scared me, just that the fact I could do that in under ten direction changes that weren't enough that I noticeably deviated from a straight line. I couldn't imagine what a quick left-right would do. Lift springs are often stiffer than the factory springs, and that does mean a slight increase in roll resistance (more work to compress the one side) but the higher centre of gravity as a result of increased height would negate most of that benefit. As has been said, a sway bar is a spring that resists left-right differences in suspension height. It keeps the body more level in corners, allowing less change in steering geometry and generally just more predictable handling. The pro-rock sway bar came about because professionals recognized a need for some roll resistance, just without as much limitation on differential suspension travel as the stock ones create. Pretty much, the pro-rock is just a lighter sway bar, although it's also adjustable to allow for multiple suspension variations or driving styles. As far as flex goes: This is with the 28mm bar still connected. All four wheels on the ground, and the rock is taller than the clearance under my bumper. I'm sure you could find yourself in a more twisted position off-road if you tried, but that front right tire is almost on the bumpstop. Suffice it to say while there are definitely places you need more flex, you've probably got a pretty built rig already if you're regularly visiting them, and disconnects won't be that big an expense over the rest of the build. Even if it's just some quick pins replacing the lower bolts, it's still better than running on the street without a sway bar.

I don't know of many places that would allow you to return an ecu after it's been installed, either, or many other electronics, simply because you don't know that the new ecu didn't get cooked by whatever problem was originally on the vehicle. Or if the problem had anything to do with the ecu. Maybe I'm just cynical, though.

I talk to Napa at least once a day for work. They're usually pretty good, but there are some things you just can't know until you try it out. The good parts guys know a lot, but they're not mechanics or engineers, not that that's the end-all of knowledge either. All I'm saying is you can't know how something will behave in an unconventional application unless you know exactly how the thing behaves, or have done it already. Stored codes don't trigger CELs on an OBD1 unless there's something wrong at that exact second, so unless there's extra emissions equipment controlled by the ecu that it wouldn't be seeing on a non-Cali Jeep, I'm not sure how the ECU would know it's in the wrong Jeep. The only California-only parts I can find in the manual are ECU, catalytic converter, and emissions stickers. I'm not seeing wiring harness differences, or extra/different sensors, or anything. There's no downstream O2 sensor (at least not in the manual) so the ecu can't tell what the cat's doing, and I don't expect it can read the sticker either. Maybe the guys at Napa have put an OBD1 Cali-only ecu in an OBD1 non-Cali Jeep and observed it, maybe they're basing it off experience putting a Cali ECU in some other non-Cali vehicle, who knows. But it doesn't make sense to me that it would trigger the CEL. But hey, I could be wrong.

Ralph's career has contributed a small handful of things to automotive safety, in particular its highened public awareness and automaker accountability. But yeah, most of what he had to say about the Corvair is hogwash, and unfortunately it's caused a huge number of people to shy away from the unconventional. In particular, rear-biassed weight distribution can be used by a skilled operator to help steer the vehicle in less than ideal traction situations, or just an everyday slide. Except North American driver education and testing systems just reinforce obience to traffic laws and don't really focus on actual vehicle operation, so most operators are not anywhere close to equipped to handle less-than-ideal traction, or control the vehicle when the limits of traction have otherwise been exceeded.

Wouldn't surprise me either if the CEL wouldn't illuminate for a Cali ecu in a non-Cali application. Even the best parts guys won't know every single bit of programming on every ECU. In many cases like that it's an educated guess, unless they have specifically done that, put the wrong ecu into an XJ. But the other reason it wouldn't surprise me if the cel stays off is it doesn't always seem to come on even when the ecu throws codes.

Huge difference, even on an overcast and drizzly day. Or maybe flaky, it was snowing more than raining. Unfortunately, After putting almost 1000 miles on them in the dark, I can't really say I'm super excited about the ECE regulations. The high beams do throw quite a bit more light forwards than I was expecting, which is nice, but there's not as much light getting cast outwards into the ditches, especially on low beams, which is definitely an issue. It also brings up some thoughts on the development of regulated headlights. The two common headlight designs are the SAE/DOT, and the ECE. The DOT are effectively just a light bulb. There's some focussing and projection, and more recently some cutoffs to control the light a bit more, but generally it's just a big scattered dispersion of light; low beams are mostly just dimmer than high beams. ECE's on the other hand, projection and cutoffs are critical to the design. The lights project mostly straight forwards, without much going off to the sides. The low beams have sharp cutoffs especially on the left hand side of the beam, to avoid sending light upwards at oncoming drivers or into the mirrors of the car ahead. The aiming of the lights is also regulated, with specific requirements that higher-mounted lights on taller vehicles will be aimed further down, to maintain the cutoffs and avoid blinding other drivers. This is all well and good, and you'd imagine it would be better than the DOT's, but there are some serious disadvantages. Here's a handy comparison between the two beam patterns, to help illustrate: NB. This a single low beam, you actually have two patterns like this, from each light. The left side of the white ECE pattern is pretty sharply cut off. It doesn't go up at oncoming drivers, and projects the cutoff light forwards onto the road instead of bleeding it downwards or to the dudes. The DOT beam in yellow underneath doesn't have a sharp cutoff, it just scatters the light sideways until the beam has faded out, meaning it doesn't illuminate the road as well, and there's more glare into oncoming traffic. But what it does do is put some admittedly dim light wide into the ditches. If you go back fifty odd years (70? I haven't really looked into it) to when headlights were starting to be developed, there were some significant differences between European and North American development, in particular western North America. Comparatively, drivers in Europe were driving shorter distances at lower speeds on narrow winding roads, going from village to village. North American drivers, especially in the west, were driving faster on far longer distances on straight, wide, roads through largely undeveloped areas. Why is historical development of the west a big deal? I present to you a modern light pollution map. Phone screenshot, yes. See any difference between Europe and western North America? And this is much later than when headlight regulations were being established. Why is this relevant? Well, if you look at it you'll notice there is significantly more light pollution in Europe. There are straight up holes out west where there is basically no ambient artificial light. I'm lucky enough to live right smack in the middle of the big dark spot above the N in North America. On a clear night the moon is the primary source of light. If there's a new moon, the stars are it. Overcast? Nada. No light at all. This is a very similar driving environment to the one American auto makers needed to develop adequate lights for over half a century ago. ECE regulators were less concerned about rural driving because such a high percentage of the population is so highly urban. Not blinding traffic and pedestrians on busy inter-urban routes is far more important. The E-codes do a fantastic job of sending light onto the road, but there is no light whatsoever outside the beams, and the increased brightness on the road contrasts so much more with the completely dark ditches that it's even harder to see something outside the beam. The more concentrated high beams mean you're causing way more distress to oncoming traffic much sooner, meaning you're using the low beams more, so quite a bit of your field of vision is simply dark. Also that kick up of the low beams on the right does a damn fine job of illuminating reflective signs, meaning you're dazzling yourself as you approach them against a pitch-black background, and the somewhat focussed light going upwards and to the right means if you meet someone on a right-handed corner, you're pointing light straight into their windshield. Probably 25% of traffic I encountered on right-handers flashed me after I had already dimmed my lights. In contrast the DOT lights are less focused and less bright, but at least they're putting some light outwards into the wide ditches, and downwards too into the deeper ones, and also the lower contrast between lighter and darker areas mean your eyes can adjust far better to the dimmer light. The E-codes definitely rely pretty heavily on ambient light. I realized this, as my 300-mile (one way) commute takes me through 50-60 miles of what I've come to know as Frack-Land. Gas wells, compressor stations, (I really don't know what all it is), gigantic open flames everywhere, generating near ridiculous levels of light pollution. I have no problems with my headlights travelling through that section of highway. The yellowed originals weren't great through that section, but the ecodes work quite nicely there. Outside that zone, not so much. With the ecodes in, I've come far closer to hitting wildlife than I ever did with the super dim yellowed lights, because I simply had no clue it was in the ditch moving towards the road. With the original lights, I may not have picked up stationary wildlife as easily, but moving deer were easy enough to pick out. With the ecodes, I'm lucky to even catch eye-shine on low beams, let alone the silhouette of a deer, before it starts running up onto the road. And the whitetails are only the little deer. There's also mule deer, elk all over the place, the occasional moose, even the odd caribou that I've seen along the edge of that highway, not to mention bears during the summer, big-horn sheep, and tons of other wildlife attracted to all the road salt or the prey animals that come to the salt licks. All big, none going to be comfortable to hit, none easy to avoid on increasingly slick roads. So yeah, basically I'm saying that the E-codes are so much better at illuminating the road that they're actually inadequate at illuminating anything else, which is what I had trouble seeing. Even old and yellowed, the original lights provided enough forward visibility to allow reasonably safe night driving, even if the lack of light was a bit uncomfortable at times. The Ecodes definitely do a fantastic job of illuminating the road and I can see why they're popular and considered a significant upgrade. But they're just not the correct lights for my application. That scattered light from the DOTs is simply critical when there's no other light around. I'll be leaving them in for now because I don't really want to spend the money for another set of lights, but I'll probably end up replacing them sooner rather than later which is unfortunate, because they really are good at illuminating the road, provided all the obstacles stay put while you drive by.

I bet you haven't thought about a certain provenance of very small, lightweight engines yet... As a plus, it'll come with a CVT setup like a modern car, no clutch to worry about, even. Some of them even come with reverse! I mean you did say hypothetical, right?

Isn't that essentially what a Jeep is?

Well, got the e-codes in this weekend. It's not quite as straightforward as it was made out to be in the odd reference I found online to the mod... Lots of dead links from ca2000, though. I'm doing a bit of a write-up here because of that, although it seems like I wasn't so good at taking pics all the way through. I used NOS Mopar units, part numbers 55054576 (passenger) and 55055577 (driver) which aren't as common to find in North America (only a couple on eBay) but they're more commonly available from the aftermarket. You'll also need a pair of H4 bulb sockets and wire slicing connections. I used the Grote sealed-beam pigtail which was like $3/side at my parts store. You may be able to find adapter pigtails online to avoid cutting, but this was something I forgot to pick up and that's what the local parts store had. The main draw to the ecodes for me was the glass lenses. I'm expecting them to last a bit longer without getting scratched and yellowed than the plastic DOT lenses. But I was also curious to try them out after hearing so many people talk about how much better the E-code is to the DOT. Can you tell which is the ecode? If you said driver's side, you guessed wrong. Removing the grill is mostly unnecessary, unless your lights are really on there, although I don't know that it gave me any better access to anything, just seemed like it would. The first step was to pull the turn signal lenses. There's a diagonal screw into the top that you need to open the hood to get at, and the other one is between the turn and parking light lenses. Your cheap socket set's multi bit screwdriver won't get at it because the socket won't go between the two, but probably any #2 Phillips will do the trick. (One of the write-ups I saw said #2 Torx... that's not a thing, a t2 would be tiny, but it's also not a Torx.) The next step is to carefully pull the headlight lense straight out. There are three ball/sockets holding it in, at both bottom corners and the top outside corner. The top one and the diagonally opposite one are respectively your up/down and left/right adjusters, so you want to avoid damaging them. I used a forked prybar to carefully pop them out because I was pulling harder than I liked, at least for plastic below freezing. You can see the two outer attachment points here. The top one clips in to the square slot at the absolute top. The bottom one is central to the photo, underneath the arm of the Y in the wiring harness, but above the upside-down T. The screw at bottom left is for the turn signal lense. This is the inner bottom corner mount (the third one, not in the photo of the other two). This one was harder to locate a prybar on because everything is plastic around it. I eventually stuck a rag down to protect paint and went off the upper rad support. Once you get the lense assembly pulled back a few inches, you'll need to cut the headlight socket off, unless you're using an adapter pigtail, in which case this is when you just unplug the headlight bulb. If you are cutting wires, for hooking it back up, black is ground, purple is low beam, and red is high beam, at least on my ZJ. Respectively black, yellow, and orange on the Grote pigtail. Instead of a straight splice, I used spade terminals, to make it easier if I ever decide to go back to DOT lenses and the factory 9004 bulbs. At this point you'll probably want to make sure your adjusters aren't seized. (yeah the photo's a repeat). The up/down adjuster is the round hole just behind the bolt in the upper rad support. There's a plastic bit with an internal hex. I used a 6mm Alan key in it, I couldn't get a 1/4" into it. I couldn't get mine to turn, and hit them with some penetrating oil, which freed up the up/down movement. Hopefully there are no negative effects on the plastic... Before the ecodes go in, you'll need to swap out the clip for the vertical adjuster, detailed here: https://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f13/kolak-e-code-headlight-conversion-detailed-write-up-1310947/ That's a pretty good write-up of the process, but the Mopar housings are chromed ceramic, not plastic like the Kolaks, and there's no way you'll just pop the US clips into them without opening up the sides of the hole a bit. The tip of a small file worked for me to slightly expand the square holes. I also found filing a bevel into the edge helpful for popping in the clip. Now plug in the h4 socket and carefully line up the three mounting sockets with the three mounting balls, then push firmly. I gave them a couple firm taps with the heal of my hand to pop the sockets onto the balls. You don't want to hit or push too hard, because again you risk damaging the adjuster mechanisms, but you do want to seat all three balls in the sockets. A tug at each corner will confirm if they're seated. Now you just need to put the turn signal lense back on, and the grille if you took it off. Then you can adjust them properly, following the regular procedure, and you're done. I I tested them out with a trial by fire on a 300 mile drive up the "scenic route to Alaska" on an overcast night, with a bit of snow in the air. They do alright. It's tough to compare them directly to the factory ones in my case because my lenses were pretty badly yellowed, but they do a decent job. It took a bit of getting used to having a ton less light on the driver's side than on passenger on low beams, given the ecodes kick up on the right to better illuminate signs. But they definitely are more than adequate. I don't think I'd want much brighter either than the bulbs that came with, especially in the snow. And now of course I need to replace the turn signals and parking lights so they match the new shiny headlights. Whoops.

From research on this, around '86 or so they changed the size of the head studs, from 7/16" to 1/2" like in the 4.0. Otherwise I've been assured by people who've already posted in this thread that everything is interchangeable between blocks and heads. I've also encountered references to the AMC 2.5 being used in the Eagle Premier, but the AMC Rambler was definitely long gone before the 2.5 came to be.

I've had both the grabber at2 and BFG ko2, although on different vehicles. In my experience, the at2's seem to do better on snow and ice, although that's contrary to most of the online reviews. I'd also say they're roughly comparable on/off-road, although that's comparing my open-diff MJ to my g80 Jimmy that weighs ~500lbs more. The KO2's also have a much flashier look to them, with lightening bolt side lugs, etc, that I'm not really into. I definitely lean more towards the Grabbers, although the BFG's are available in a 33x10.5/15 which is eventually what I want on my MJ, and the AT2's are not. I don't know that there are any other winter rated tires though in that size, and that's pretty important to me, so I'll probably end up with another set of KO2's, whenever it becomes time. The AT2's did about 30,000 miles, probably 10-15% on gravel, before I ran over a deer carcus (staring at a gigantic orange moon rising, not the road) and seemed to be not quite halfway into the tread. The KO2's did about 6000 miles, didn't seem to be wearing excessively, but I sold the POS Jimmy they were on. As far as what the absolute best tire is? That's the sort of question you'll ask ten people and get ten different answers. We've had decent experience with Goodyear Wrangler Duratracs as well on our work trucks. Generally we go with whatever we can get cheapest in the factory size, out of those three. My recommendation is to figure out what size you want to run, find out what's available in that size, the pick whatever best meets your needs from the tire. Look at online reviews, etc. Tirerack.com is a great source for info, even if you don't plan on buying from them.

I don't think there are special cotter pins for axle nuts, just get some that fit nicely in the hole. The nut and threads on the spindle are what take the load from driving forces. The cotter pin just stops the nut from turning and changing the preload on the bearing.

On my MJ, when I first bought it, the rockers seemed solid, but it only took about ten miles of gravel before the bondo and chicken wire just straight up fell out of the passenger side. It didn't look too bad initially, but after ignoring it for longer than I should have, and now leaving it sit... there's not much left of them. I had an excuse to head down to Calgary last weekend but not a good enough one to merit the 7 hour drive... but I don't remember now what it was.

I want to say it did... But I had my Bosch put in a year ago so my memory may be foggy. The Delphi pump I initially got did have it for sure, but I can't recommend the Delphi at all. It didn't even come close to fitting. The adapters were total junk. I managed to jury rig it in there with some hose clamps, but it was barely over a week of use before I suddenly couldn't get gas out of the bottom third of the tank.

Likely poor grounds on the headlight harness. Clean up the plug under the airbox.

The two straps use a slotted hole as a fastener to hold them to the bed sides. Lift the tailgate slightly and slide them to the big part of the slot to pop them off the bed. Then with the tailgate about half-way closed, you should be able to lift the right end of it off the hinge. With the right side off, pull the gate back far enough to clear the bedside, then pull it to the right to pull it out of the left hinge. You'll want to be standing towards the middle when you do this so you can grab it with both hands. It's not particukarky heavy, but it's an awkward carry. I'd be inclined to believe steel cable will support a higher load than the stamped sheet-metal straps on the MJ, but I could always be wrong. That tiny bit around where they attach bends really easily, and I doubt it's going to be too sturdy of its been bent back and forth a few times. I've known too many people who've lost their tailgates after driving with it open to risk it myself, unless there's enough weight sitting on it to stop it from bouncing up into a position where the hinge could come apart. I'd rather leave plywood or lumber or something sitting on the top edge of the closed tailgate.

"far more easily seen at night" means they're taking away from your outward visibility. Daily drivers should be better able to grip the road, not less good. Those four tiny patches of rubber are the only thing holding you on the road. My daily driver is on adequate rubber, not the minimum acceptable. All I'm saying is you're not on very firm grounds to be criticizing what other people do, and then you repeatedly defend the criticism.

Yeah. It really depends on the company. For mine, third-party (legal minimum) is going to cover whatever I hit; collision covers my vehicle when I hit something, and comprehensive covers everything else, (trees, hit&run) including wildlife. And where I live, wildlife isn't necessarily when you hit something. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/jasper-national-park-elk-rutting-season-dangers-1.4832370

I'm going to say that coffee can is hilarious, and if done right is probably better isolated from the engine bay than the K&N filter "box" that came with my ZJ. I'll also point out that in "very cool weather" I've still had antifreeze slushed in my coolant overflow, despite having just driven about 20 miles. I have trouble believing it was "well above 100°F" in there. Given how much janky garbage we've seen people do that they deemed perfectly acceptable, I like the coffee can. It's not going to take away from the driving experience or road safety any more than no-season no-traction Walmart Wranglers, or green dash lights that reduce your visibility... Everyone has they own taste. The coffee can is great; I say keep it.

It looks like an AW4 pan to me, I suppose. Yeah, an '88 should've had a mechanical speedometer. But considering all the customization that's been done, there no guarantee you've got a mechanical speedometer in the dash. It's likely, but at this point, who knows. In theory the cable you need is the same as a same-year XJ, and the mechanical sender should just drop right into the tcase like the electronic one does. This is assuming you have the correct gauge for the mechanical setup.

Take a photo of the trans and post it up. Sounds a ton like manually shifting the factory AW4. Seems like a PO's hack workaround for a problem with the TCM... likely a blown trans fuse.

http://www.cruiser54.com Is it really that tough to remember?

https://www.custompickup.com/shop/index.php?l=search_list&s[match]=all&s[search]=Jeep+Comanche+&s[title]=Y&s[short_desc]=Y&s[full_desc]=Y&s[cid]=0&s[subcats]=Y&s[mid]=0 So that's a thing I found a couple years ago. Never ordered from them so I can't really say anything much more than that.

Under the battery tray sounds like a terrible location for a pcm to me. Or frankly anything, really.

Not to dissuade you from asking questions, but you may find this thread of interest: Its an index of the topics you'll find in the "DIY projects" forum. There's an entire section on brakes. As to what specific upgrades will net better results I can't really say.